NSG Senate Chamber [NSG Senate] - Version 4

[Macedonian Grand Empire]

OOC: So Uganda and OAE? And that is many places?

Uganda, Malaysia, the United Arab Emirates, Ghana, Nigeria, India, the Phillipines, South Africa... And more.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_su ... l_monarchs

They just accept the title. And when you open the list you do not get any of those countries. So no. I am voting for the constitution and against any amendment to institute subnational monarchies when it comes up.

[Dangelia]

Uganda, Malaysia, the United Arab Emirates, Ghana, Nigeria, India, the Phillipines, South Africa... And more.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_su ... l_monarchs

They just accept the title. And when you open the list you do not get any of those countries. So no. I am voting for the constitution and against any amendment to institute subnational monarchies when it comes up.

I swear, you're like the Neo-Rome Republic of the NFC.

[Oneracon]

Fellow Senators,

I come before you as a member of the convention responsible for drafting this constitution, who ceased participation in the drafting of the constitution some time ago because I resolved to vote against it regardless of what happened next. I wish to explain in detail why I and my party will be voting against the new constitution in the chamber, despite insistences that it is fair and neutral and has bipartisan support.

The reason we oppose this constitution is not because it does not recognise Aurentina as a constitutional monarchy as we desire, despite false and disingenuous reports to the contrary. We recognise that there is no support for the traditional system of government in the Commonwealth at present, and though we regret this we have no wish to force our views on an unwilling populace. This is, however, exactly what this constitution's drafting committee, overwhelmingly republican in composition, is doing to the people of those Aurentine provinces where support for the hereditary principle and native aristocracy remains high. Myself and the sadly absent Senator de Medici proposed several months ago that the constitution, which adopts a federal system for Aurentina's provinces, should provide for the establishment of hereditary chief executives in those regions where majority support for them might occur, thus allowing traditionally-minded provinces to opt to allow local ducal or comital families to serve a role in their local government.

In no way would this agreement infringe upon the democratic will of the majority of the Commonwealth's population to remain a republic, nor would it violate the rights of the inhabitants of those provinces in question as subnational monarchies of this sort, which exist in many places around the world already, would require the support of the local population to be established and would remain answerable to local legislative assemblies and the national government. Yet this proposal was refused by the majority of the constitutional convention, who favoured upholding the republican ideal even where it did not correspond with the local democratic will. This is an example of tyranny by majority, and I fear that the national government running roughshod over the rights and will of provincial governments and populations in this way will only fuel support for secessionist movements such as the one which has recently resorted to terroristic actions in Arenden. It is for this reason that I and my fellow party members remain steadfastly opposed to the proposed constitution, which we feel is not so politically unbiased as our opponents claim.

If the Senate of Aurentina is unwilling to allow this small concession to a significant minority of the electoral caucus, for the sake of passing the first ever bill in Aurentine history with genuinely universal support and establishing a constitution that genuinely has the approval of every party in the Senate, I fear that this nation may not be so tolerant of dissenting voices as it prides itself on being.

Long live the Queen and the people of Aurentina.

I don't see a problem with this, but I think it would make more sense to have it done as an amendment than to try to change the constitution now right before it's slated to be voted upon.

I agree, as I said before

This constitution is the work of Senators from across the political spectrum who toiled since our nation's independence to create a solid and neutral governing document. If someone wishes to see it amended for their own purposes then they can use the amending formula once it is passed.

[Macedonian Grand Empire]

They just accept the title. And when you open the list you do not get any of those countries. So no. I am voting for the constitution and against any amendment to institute subnational monarchies when it comes up.

I swear, you're like the Neo-Rome Republic of the NFC.

Those subnational monarchs have zero control over the way they provinces are run. Most of the time they are for show. Nothing else zero control. although there was some problem with my software I finally managed to open them. Some drivers went offline and I have seen the lists like they should be on that link so I take the part about not being on the list back OT. Sorry for the misunderstanding. But I am still against sub national monarchies.

[Geilinor]

They just accept the title. And when you open the list you do not get any of those countries. So no. I am voting for the constitution and against any amendment to institute subnational monarchies when it comes up.

I swear, you're like the Neo-Rome Republic of the NFC.

Most of those subnational monarchs are not recognized by the government, except in Malaysia, which is a constitutional monarchy.

[Costa Fierro]

If the Senate of Aurentina is unwilling to allow this small concession to a significant minority of the electoral caucus.

It's not a small concession and it goes against the beliefs of a majority of senators here. Why should we pander to minority of people because they dislike something? The Senate doesn't pass bills pandering to communists, fascists or any other kind of ideology so why should we do the same for monarchists? What makes them more special and more deserving than others?

[People Who Say Ni]

I submit this bill to the chamber.

Life Protection Act
Author: People Who Say Ni | Category: Health | Urgency: Low
Sponsors: TheLiberatedTerritories [LP], Dendart [CMP], The Nihilistic view [ALM], Corena [RefP], New Zephua [ALM], The Neo-Confederate States of America [LP]

The senate of Aurentina,

RECOGNISES that the act of abortion is an objectively grave matter which has been reduced to an issue of a woman's convenience;
APPALLED at the complete legality of this crime which our nation puports under the fascade of the Bodily Soverignity Act;
BELIEVING that the right to life is a much more fundamental value than reproductive freedom;

hereby passes the following legislation:
1) The section of the Bodily Sovereignty Act reading

"Reproductive rights: An individual will have final authority regarding their reproductive organs, sexual actions and reproduction provided,
all individual involved in said act have provided informed consent to said act."

is struck out null and void,
2a) Abortion is the deliberate act of terminating a pregnancy via the removal or death of the human fetus.
2b) The execution of an abortion after the first trimester is a delict unless the abortion was required to save the life of the aborted fetus' mother.

Code: Select all

[box][align=center][size=150]Life Protection Act[/size]
[b]Author:[/b][nation] People Who Say Ni[/nation] | [b]Category:[/b] Health | [b]Urgency:[/b] Low
[b]Sponsors:[/b] [nation]TheLiberatedTerritories[/nation] [LP], [nation]Dendart[/nation] [CMP], [nation]The Nihilistic view[/nation] [ALM], [nation]Corena[/nation] [RefP], [nation]New Zephua[/nation] [ALM], [nation]The Neo-Confederate States of America[/nation] [LP][/align]
[i]The senate of Aurentina,[/i]
[blocktext][b]RECOGNISES[/b] that the act of abortion is an objectively grave matter which has been reduced to an issue of a woman's convenience;
 [b]APPAULED[/b] at the complete legality of this crime which our nation puports under the fascade of the Bodily Soverignity Act;
 [b]BELIEVING [/b]that the right to life is a much more fundamental value than reproductive freedom;[/blocktext]hereby passes the following legislation:
[b]1)[/b] The section of the Bodily Sovereignty Act reading
   [blocktext]"Reproductive rights: An individual will have final authority regarding their reproductive organs, sexual actions and reproduction provided,
   all individual involved in said act have provided informed consent to said act."[/blocktext]is struck out null and void,
[b]2a)[/b] Abortion is the deliberate act of terminating a pregnancy via the removal or death of the human fetus.
[b]2b)[/b] The execution of an abortion after the first trimester is a delict unless the abortion was required to save the life of the aborted fetus' mother.[/box]

[Lamaredia]

I submit this bill to the chamber.

Life Protection Act
Author: People Who Say Ni | Category: Health | Urgency: Low
Sponsors: TheLiberatedTerritories [LP], Dendart [CMP], The Nihilistic view [ALM], Corena [RefP], New Zephua [ALM], The Neo-Confederate States of America [LP]

The senate of Aurentina,

RECOGNISES that the act of abortion is an objectively grave matter which has been reduced to an issue of a woman's convenience;
APPALLED at the complete legality of this crime which our nation puports under the fascade of the Bodily Soverignity Act;
BELIEVING that the right to life is a much more fundamental value than reproductive freedom;

hereby passes the following legislation:
1) The section of the Bodily Sovereignty Act reading

"Reproductive rights: An individual will have final authority regarding their reproductive organs, sexual actions and reproduction provided,
all individual involved in said act have provided informed consent to said act."

is struck out null and void,
2a) Abortion is the deliberate act of terminating a pregnancy via the removal or death of the human fetus.
2b) The execution of an abortion after the first trimester is a delict unless the abortion was required to save the life of the aborted fetus' mother.

Code: Select all

[box][align=center][size=150]Life Protection Act[/size]
[b]Author:[/b][nation] People Who Say Ni[/nation] | [b]Category:[/b] Health | [b]Urgency:[/b] Low
[b]Sponsors:[/b] [nation]TheLiberatedTerritories[/nation] [LP], [nation]Dendart[/nation] [CMP], [nation]The Nihilistic view[/nation] [ALM], [nation]Corena[/nation] [RefP], [nation]New Zephua[/nation] [ALM], [nation]The Neo-Confederate States of America[/nation] [LP][/align]
[i]The senate of Aurentina,[/i]
[blocktext][b]RECOGNISES[/b] that the act of abortion is an objectively grave matter which has been reduced to an issue of a woman's convenience;
 [b]APPAULED[/b] at the complete legality of this crime which our nation puports under the fascade of the Bodily Soverignity Act;
 [b]BELIEVING [/b]that the right to life is a much more fundamental value than reproductive freedom;[/blocktext]hereby passes the following legislation:
[b]1)[/b] The section of the Bodily Sovereignty Act reading
   [blocktext]"Reproductive rights: An individual will have final authority regarding their reproductive organs, sexual actions and reproduction provided,
   all individual involved in said act have provided informed consent to said act."[/blocktext]is struck out null and void,
[b]2a)[/b] Abortion is the deliberate act of terminating a pregnancy via the removal or death of the human fetus.
[b]2b)[/b] The execution of an abortion after the first trimester is a delict unless the abortion was required to save the life of the aborted fetus' mother.[/box]

For shame Ni.

Added.

[President Pro-Tempore of the Senate]

This has sufficient support for the queue.

Aircraft Carrier Restriction Act
Drafted by: Yanalia [RG]
Sponsors: Unicario [RG], Costa Fierro [RefP], Osea 767 [CP], Pesda [RG], Skeckoa [LP]
Category: International Relations

The Senate of the Aurentine Commonwealth,

RECOGNISING that the nation does not currently require an aircraft carrier,

DISAPPROVING of the plans of the current government to purchase one,

NOTING that the Senate should voice its opinion on such an expensive and significant project,

ALARMED that the government has ignored protest against the purchase of an aircraft carrier,

HEREBY enacts the following:

For the purposes of this act, an aircraft carrier shall be a warship with a full-length flight deck and facilities for carrying, arming, deploying, and recovering aircraft, that serves as a seagoing airbase.

1. Any current projects on the part of the Ministry of Defence involving the acquisition of aircraft carriers shall be halted immediately.

2. Acquisitions of aircraft carriers shall require the approval of the Senate.

Code: Select all

[spoiler=Aircraft Carrier Restriction Act][box][size=150]Aircraft Carrier Restriction Act[/size]
Drafted by: Yanalia [RG]
Sponsors: Unicario [RG], Costa Fierro [RefP], Osea 767 [CP], Pesda [RG], Skeckoa [LP]
Category: International Relations

The Senate of the Aurentine Commonwealth,

RECOGNISING that the nation does not currently require an aircraft carrier,

DISAPPROVING of the plans of the current government to purchase one,

NOTING that the Senate should voice its opinion on such an expensive and significant project,

ALARMED that the government has ignored protest against the purchase of an aircraft carrier,

HEREBY enacts the following:

For the purposes of this act, an aircraft carrier shall be a warship with a full-length flight deck and facilities for carrying, arming, deploying, and recovering aircraft, that serves as a seagoing airbase.

1. Any current projects on the part of the Ministry of Defence involving the acquisition of aircraft carriers shall be halted immediately.

2. Acquisitions of aircraft carriers shall require the approval of the Senate.[/box][/spoiler]

Added. ~ Secretary

[Lamaredia]

I submit this bill to the chamber.

Life Protection Act
Author: People Who Say Ni | Category: Health | Urgency: Low
Sponsors: TheLiberatedTerritories [LP], Dendart [CMP], The Nihilistic view [ALM], Corena [RefP], New Zephua [ALM], The Neo-Confederate States of America [LP]

The senate of Aurentina,

RECOGNISES that the act of abortion is an objectively grave matter which has been reduced to an issue of a woman's convenience;
APPALLED at the complete legality of this crime which our nation puports under the fascade of the Bodily Soverignity Act;
BELIEVING that the right to life is a much more fundamental value than reproductive freedom;

hereby passes the following legislation:
1) The section of the Bodily Sovereignty Act reading

"Reproductive rights: An individual will have final authority regarding their reproductive organs, sexual actions and reproduction provided,
all individual involved in said act have provided informed consent to said act."

is struck out null and void,
2a) Abortion is the deliberate act of terminating a pregnancy via the removal or death of the human fetus.
2b) The execution of an abortion after the first trimester is a delict unless the abortion was required to save the life of the aborted fetus' mother.

Code: Select all

[box][align=center][size=150]Life Protection Act[/size]
[b]Author:[/b][nation] People Who Say Ni[/nation] | [b]Category:[/b] Health | [b]Urgency:[/b] Low
[b]Sponsors:[/b] [nation]TheLiberatedTerritories[/nation] [LP], [nation]Dendart[/nation] [CMP], [nation]The Nihilistic view[/nation] [ALM], [nation]Corena[/nation] [RefP], [nation]New Zephua[/nation] [ALM], [nation]The Neo-Confederate States of America[/nation] [LP][/align]
[i]The senate of Aurentina,[/i]
[blocktext][b]RECOGNISES[/b] that the act of abortion is an objectively grave matter which has been reduced to an issue of a woman's convenience;
 [b]APPAULED[/b] at the complete legality of this crime which our nation puports under the fascade of the Bodily Soverignity Act;
 [b]BELIEVING [/b]that the right to life is a much more fundamental value than reproductive freedom;[/blocktext]hereby passes the following legislation:
[b]1)[/b] The section of the Bodily Sovereignty Act reading
   [blocktext]"Reproductive rights: An individual will have final authority regarding their reproductive organs, sexual actions and reproduction provided,
   all individual involved in said act have provided informed consent to said act."[/blocktext]is struck out null and void,
[b]2a)[/b] Abortion is the deliberate act of terminating a pregnancy via the removal or death of the human fetus.
[b]2b)[/b] The execution of an abortion after the first trimester is a delict unless the abortion was required to save the life of the aborted fetus' mother.[/box]

I urge every senator to vote nay to this bill when it comes to vote. It's trying to fundamentally destroy a right of a woman to her own body, which is something I won't stand for. Sen. Joseph Vehrstadt (NDP, IP, CMP)

[Old Tyrannia]

If the Senate of Aurentina is unwilling to allow this small concession to a significant minority of the electoral caucus.

It's not a small concession and it goes against the beliefs of a majority of senators here.

And why should the elected representatives of 51% of Aurentina enforce their views upon the 49% of Aurentina that disagrees with them? Who are you to deny the people of Aurentina's provinces a choice in how their province is governed because it conflicts with your beliefs?

Why should we pander to minority of people because they dislike something?

We are not asking you to pander, we are asking you to compromise and extend the right of self-determination to the provinces of the Aurentine Commonwealth, to allow them to chose their own government.

The Senate doesn't pass bills pandering to communists, fascists or any other kind of ideology so why should we do the same for monarchists? What makes them more special and more deserving than others?

I am not even going to answer this ridiculous strawman.

[Costa Fierro]

And why should the elected representatives of 51% of Aurentina enforce their views upon the 49% of Aurentina that disagrees with them?

Firstly, Senator, you are in such a small minority, it won't matter. Secondly, don't bitch about the "tyranny of the majority", because if the majority of senators pass something, that is what the majority of senators want. They feel that they support a bill enough to vote for it and it's the same for people who are ambiguous on their views or who disagree entirely.

It's called "democracy". A concept that seems to be quite foreign to people who support unelected leaders and "birthrights".

Who are you to deny the people of Aurentina's provinces a choice in how their province is governed because it conflicts with your beliefs?

Isn't this what you're doing? Obstructing a bill which I believe has majority support because it doesn't specifically cater to your own beliefs? I would have thought this Senator would have had the sense to have a long, hard look at his own arguments and justifications before lashing out at others?

We are not asking you to pander.

Yes you are. You are asking people to change something in a bill to satisfy your beliefs. Not try and work out an agreement that pleases both parties? One would have thought that someone wanting to talk about compromise would have a proposal ready for consideration instead of steadfastly demanding that the creators of the constitution change a clause so it suits you and your colleagues. I am not sure about you, Senator, but I do not see making demands of others as a "compromise".

We are asking you to compromise and extend the right of self-determination to the provinces of the Aurentine Commonwealth, to allow them to chose their own government.

The proposed constitution has clauses creating semi-federal state that allows provinces to create their own legislatures, laws and subnational bodies within government guidelines. I was the one that created the local government parts added to the constitution that required that certain powers be granted to city councils. It is self-determination within a state. They choose their leaders. They elect who represents them at a state level.

This has already been provided for in the constitution. I don't see why you're taking this avenue of justification for your refusal to vote. I would never say you have to vote for this, Senator. But at least try to have a valid justification for your not voting.

I am not even going to answer this ridiculous strawman.

It's not a strawman. This is the attitude presented by yourself and your fellow party members on this issue. Making demands of others to suit your own agenda. To be quite frank, Senator, it's a pathetic display. Your "concerns" about the constitution are unfounded. There is nothing in the constitution that prevents "self determination" (although secession is another matter entirely, if it hasn't already been sorted it will be once it is finished).

[Old Tyrannia]

And why should the elected representatives of 51% of Aurentina enforce their views upon the 49% of Aurentina that disagrees with them?

Firstly, Senator, you are in such a small minority, it won't matter. Secondly, don't bitch about the "tyranny of the majority", because if the majority of senators pass something, that is what the majority of senators want. They feel that they support a bill enough to vote for it and it's the same for people who are ambiguous on their views or who disagree entirely.

Sir, your language is entirely inappropriate for this chamber. Furthermore, if you are so convinced that monarchists form an insignificant portion of Aurentina's population you should surely not be opposed to allowing Aurentina's provinces the option of establishing a provincial hereditary executive, as clearly there will be no desire to do so and your entirely republican regime will remain secure.

It's called "democracy". A concept that seems to be quite foreign to people who support unelected leaders and "birthrights".

You betray here your true motivation for opposing this compromise; you are motivated by your own republican ideals and hatred of monarchy, which you seek to force on the rest of the Commonwealth regardless of their support.

Who are you to deny the people of Aurentina's provinces a choice in how their province is governed because it conflicts with your beliefs?

Isn't this what you're doing? Obstructing a bill which I believe has majority support because it doesn't specifically cater to your own beliefs? I would have thought this Senator would have had the sense to have a long, hard look at his own arguments and justifications before lashing out at others?

Asking that the people of Aurentina's provinces have the right to determine their own system of government is in no way equivalent to forcing my own views on the population. No province will be forced to establish a monarchy under my proposal, while every province will be forced to establish a republic under yours.

We are not asking you to pander.

Yes you are. You are asking people to change something in a bill to satisfy your beliefs. Not try and work out an agreement that pleases both parties? One would have thought that someone wanting to talk about compromise would have a proposal ready for consideration instead of steadfastly demanding that the creators of the constitution change a clause so it suits you and your colleagues. I am not sure about you, Senator, but I do not see making demands of others as a "compromise".

I am asking you to allow the people of Aurentina- who elected us to serve them, not simply pursue our own political agendas- to make the choice for themselves. This is a compromise. Do you not think that I would prefer a constitution where every province was governed by a count or a duke, and our head of state a King or Queen? Of course I would, but that is not what I am demanding. I am demanding a compromise in which any province that wishes to pursue that avenue be allowed to do so, while the majority may remain republican and the President remains head of state. It is you who are demanding that the entire nation conform to your ideals. It is you who reject any compromise.

We are asking you to compromise and extend the right of self-determination to the provinces of the Aurentine Commonwealth, to allow them to chose their own government.

The proposed constitution has clauses creating semi-federal state that allows provinces to create their own legislatures, laws and subnational bodies within government guidelines. I was the one that created the local government parts added to the constitution that required that certain powers be granted to city councils. It is self-determination within a state. They choose their leaders. They elect who represents them at a state level.

This has already been provided for in the constitution. I don't see why you're taking this avenue of justification for your refusal to vote. I would never say you have to vote for this, Senator. But at least try to have a valid justification for your not voting.

If you permit the provincial populations to possess their own laws and their own legislatures, what could possibly justify denying them the right to selecting their own form of executive? It is not like the hereditary executive will be beyond abolition at a later date if the local population thus wishes. There is simply no logical reason beyond ideological conviction to deny this compromise with Aurentina's monarchist minority, and a constitution based on cross party support should not be built on ideological conviction.

I am not even going to answer this ridiculous strawman.

It's not a strawman. This is the attitude presented by yourself and your fellow party members on this issue. Making demands of others to suit your own agenda. To be quite frank, Senator, it's a pathetic display. Your "concerns" about the constitution are unfounded. There is nothing in the constitution that prevents "self determination" (although secession is another matter entirely, if it hasn't already been sorted it will be once it is finished).

If pursuing the right of Aurentina's people to chose their own governance is pathetic, sir, then clearly I am pathetic. I shall wear it as a badge of pride.

[The Nihilistic view]

Anyway better get back to relevant business.

Two points. First does the constitution repeal the relevant bills already passed?

Second if it does the vote will begin at 10pm 12/3/14. (that is in out 18 hours for those not on our timezone.)

Well by my reckoning that gives us 7 hours of the vote left.

[Diopolis]

I submit this bill to the chamber.

Life Protection Act
Author: People Who Say Ni | Category: Health | Urgency: Low
Sponsors: TheLiberatedTerritories [LP], Dendart [CMP], The Nihilistic view [ALM], Corena [RefP], New Zephua [ALM], The Neo-Confederate States of America [LP]

The senate of Aurentina,

RECOGNISES that the act of abortion is an objectively grave matter which has been reduced to an issue of a woman's convenience;
APPALLED at the complete legality of this crime which our nation puports under the fascade of the Bodily Soverignity Act;
BELIEVING that the right to life is a much more fundamental value than reproductive freedom;

hereby passes the following legislation:
1) The section of the Bodily Sovereignty Act reading

"Reproductive rights: An individual will have final authority regarding their reproductive organs, sexual actions and reproduction provided,
all individual involved in said act have provided informed consent to said act."

is struck out null and void,
2a) Abortion is the deliberate act of terminating a pregnancy via the removal or death of the human fetus.
2b) The execution of an abortion after the first trimester is a delict unless the abortion was required to save the life of the aborted fetus' mother.

Code: Select all

[box][align=center][size=150]Life Protection Act[/size]
[b]Author:[/b][nation] People Who Say Ni[/nation] | [b]Category:[/b] Health | [b]Urgency:[/b] Low
[b]Sponsors:[/b] [nation]TheLiberatedTerritories[/nation] [LP], [nation]Dendart[/nation] [CMP], [nation]The Nihilistic view[/nation] [ALM], [nation]Corena[/nation] [RefP], [nation]New Zephua[/nation] [ALM], [nation]The Neo-Confederate States of America[/nation] [LP][/align]
[i]The senate of Aurentina,[/i]
[blocktext][b]RECOGNISES[/b] that the act of abortion is an objectively grave matter which has been reduced to an issue of a woman's convenience;
 [b]APPAULED[/b] at the complete legality of this crime which our nation puports under the fascade of the Bodily Soverignity Act;
 [b]BELIEVING [/b]that the right to life is a much more fundamental value than reproductive freedom;[/blocktext]hereby passes the following legislation:
[b]1)[/b] The section of the Bodily Sovereignty Act reading
   [blocktext]"Reproductive rights: An individual will have final authority regarding their reproductive organs, sexual actions and reproduction provided,
   all individual involved in said act have provided informed consent to said act."[/blocktext]is struck out null and void,
[b]2a)[/b] Abortion is the deliberate act of terminating a pregnancy via the removal or death of the human fetus.
[b]2b)[/b] The execution of an abortion after the first trimester is a delict unless the abortion was required to save the life of the aborted fetus' mother.[/box]

I support this act.

[Macedonian Grand Empire]

I vote for the constitution.
Also I motion for voting to be extended for the next 24 hours.

[Britanno]

Old Tyrannia what you are suggesting is pointless, because there is no single province in Aurentina in which support for a subnational monarch is even remotely high. The CMP constituencies are spread out across the nation, there is no need for something that won't be used.

[Zurkerx]

Well, if we are voting for the Constitution: I vote Aye

Also, I second this motion.

[Osea 767]

I'll vote aye and third the motion.

[Britanno]

Aye and fourth the motion.

[Haelunor]

Aye and fifth the motion.

[Lamaredia]

Aye, and sxith the motion.

[The Nihilistic view]

Ah so people have finally noticed the vote scheduled before my slightly extended absence. This should probably serve as a warning to pay attention to when I post about votes. A lesser man may have not said anything till 9.59pm tonight and then voted against the constitution to teach you a lesson. However I am not that man, So the vote will be reset and I will now super officially begin the vote at 6pm (8 mins time) on the constitution to last for the next 48 hours. It requires a super majority of more than 2/3rds to pass.

[Britanno]

Ah so people have finally noticed the vote scheduled before my slightly extended absence. This should probably serve as a warning to pay attention to when I post about votes. A lesser man may have not said anything till 9.59pm tonight and then voted against the constitution to teach you a lesson. However I am not that man, So the vote will be reset and I will now super officially begin the vote at 6pm (8 mins time) on the constitution to last for the next 48 hours. It requires a super majority of more than 2/3rds to pass.

I understand there is that law somewhere, I don't suppose you could direct me to which one it is that says it needs a supermajority to pass though could you?

[Sahrani DR]

i vote Aye.